oops? (london suspect shooting)

Tegellan · Post by **Tegellan** » July 25, 2005, 12:57 pm

His death was highly unfortunate if you ask me. But it is the stuff that happens when things go wrong, the cops thought he was running with a bomb and shot him to stop him. I wouldn't have wanted to be one of them and find out he was innocent afterwards, but on the other hand they did what they had to and that's the end of it.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 25, 2005, 1:01 pm

I can understand why they overreacted. I can not understand why they let him get onboard a train if they were going to do this. Just doesn't make sense.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » July 25, 2005, 1:05 pm

There were probably a lot of people around. I dont think cops are aloud to shoot at people with that many people just standing in the way.

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » July 25, 2005, 2:40 pm

Nick wrote:Welcome to England, where it is now A OK to shoot brown people 5 times in the head dead who haven't done anything and aren't carrying any weapons.

Btw, if you really feel like justifying this, you're so far beyond retarded you should just stop typing and punch yourself in the dick repeatedly so we never have another one of your kind. Even the fucking police aren't bothering to try.

Nick, a little common sense here.

Bombs go off in England (in particular in the subways), killing, maiming etc. Responsibility claimed by some al queda (sp) group.

Police chase a guy wearing a puffy heavy jacket in summer, he proceeds to jump the turnstile, obviously not stopping for the police who I assume identified themselves, and runs down into the subway system.

Now Nicky old boy, you are a policeman chasing this individual into the subway. The previous attacks have been committed by "suicide" bombers.
You tackled the guy and what?

Hope he is not packing enough explosives on his person to seperate your head from your ass?

Hope he calmly listens while you tell him to not press that detonator?

Honestly, I believe I would have done the same thing.

Had the guy stopped. Raised his hands. He would still be alive today.

It is NOT open season on brown skinned individuals in the UK it is open season on fools who do not do as instructed by the Police.

I do not agree with the shooting by I do understand and therefore cannot condemn it.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » July 25, 2005, 2:47 pm

"Hope he is not packing enough explosives on his person to seperate your head from your ass?"

That would not be hard seeing his head is up his ass already!!

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » July 25, 2005, 2:57 pm

Kelshara wrote:Nope. But neither does your average drunk driver, guy who runs a red light, fall asleep by the wheel working two jobs trying to feed his family etc. It not being premeditated doesn't absovle you of responsibility.

that is a retarded analogy even from a jackass like yourself.

miir · Post by **miir** » July 25, 2005, 2:58 pm

Police chase a guy wearing a puffy heavy jacket in summer

If you checked the weather before you left your house and saw that it was 17 degrees and that it was going to drop to a low of 13 degrees in the evening would you not bring or wear a jacket as well?

It's not like this guy was wearing a parka. He's from Brazil where even the winter months (in most of the country) it's warmer than the summer months in England. Wearing a hoody or windbreaker in the summer in England is pretty commonplace.

he proceeds to jump the turnstile obviously not stopping for the police who I assume identified themselves, and runs down into the subway system

While being chased by a bunch of guys in street clothes who may or may not have originally identified themselves as police officers a natural repsonse would be to flee.
Even assuming that they did identify themselves, and he had (as noted) an expired visa, it probably made sense to run into an area where it would be difficult to be caught.

Hope he is not packing enough explosives on his person to seperate your head from your ass?

If his intent was to bomb the subway, he would have had to be carrying enough explosives that would be impossible to conceal under a jacket. Sicks of dynamite strapped to a vest is not a big enough payload to cause any notable structural damage to a subway station.

-----------

This is really a case of poor judgement.

Poor judgement on the guy for running in the first place... And poor judgement on the police for not determining if the suspect was a threat before opening fire on the back of his head.

-----------

There was no weapon and no explosives.
Their only suspicion was based on the fact that he was wearing a coat on a cool english summer day.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » July 25, 2005, 3:04 pm

17C is not jacket weather. especially not in july in the UK where it gets ridiculously humid.

the dumbass decided to run from police at a time where running from police isn't a very good idea. I really don't think they would have shot him if he was running from the cops because he stole something or whatever. he also emerged from a house that was specifically being watched by the police. it's an unfortunate chain of events but in absolutely no way is it the police's fault.

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » July 25, 2005, 3:46 pm

If nothing else I am willing to bet people won't be so eager to run from the cops now.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » July 25, 2005, 3:56 pm

Police were supposedly watching his house/apartment complex because "documents from an abandoned rucksack from Thursday's bombings" had led them to it. Given this, along with the other facts of what happened, it's not hard to see why police made the choice that they did.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... wstop.html

Elsewhere, more than 40 forensic experts were drafted in to augment existing staff at two "secure" laboratories: Fort Halstead, near Sevenoaks, Kent, and the Metropolitan Police's scientific headquarters in South Lambeth Road, south London. It was at Fort Halstead that forensic experts pieced together the wreckage of the Pan Am airliner that had exploded over Lockerbie in 1988. This time their priority was to examine four bombs, hidden in rucksacks, which had been primed but, when detonated by the would-be bombers, had failed to explode. "These rucksacks are forensic goldmines," said one senior officer.

It was not only the CCTV footage and the new forensic evidence, however, that had given Scotland Yard the breakthroughs that they needed: documents, believed to be found in one of the abandoned rucksacks from Thursday's bombings, led detectives to an address in Scotia Road, Stockwell, south London. Soon after 9.30pm on Friday morning, undercover officers watched as a terrorist suspect left the address where he was staying, walked down the street and caught a bus to Stockwell station. As officers began to trail him, they clung to the hope that the man, unaware he was under surveillance, would lead them to one or more of the bombers.

The man was followed at a distance, by a team of at least 10 armed officers, including some from SO19, the specialist firearms squad. The officers had become concerned that their target was carrying a bomb not in a rucksack or holdall - he was carrying neither - but beneath the bulky, dark jacket he was wearing despite the warm weather.

The undercover team hoped against hope that the man would not decide to go into a Tube station. If he did, they would be forced to challenge him in case he was on a fresh suicide mission. Imagine the public outcry, senior officers reasoned, if it were discovered later that a suspected suicide bomber had been allowed to board a crowded rush-hour Tube train and detonate a bomb without any attempt to stop him being made by a vast team of armed officers.

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » July 25, 2005, 4:10 pm

miir wrote:
Hope he is not packing enough explosives on his person to seperate your head from your ass?
If his intent was to bomb the subway, he would have had to be carrying enough explosives that would be impossible to conceal under a jacket. Sicks of dynamite strapped to a vest is not a big enough payload to cause any notable structural damage to a subway station.

Yep, it takes a literal ton of explosives to kill people in suicide bombings. Makes you wonder how those damn Palestinians get through some of the tightest security in the world, what with all those sticks of dynamite protruding from under their fucking parkas in summer.

-----------

miir wrote:This is really a case of poor judgement.

Poor judgement on the guy for running in the first place... And poor judgement on the police for not determining if the suspect was a threat before opening fire on the back of his head.

-----------

There was no weapon and no explosives.
Their only suspicion was based on the fact that he was wearing a coat on a cool english summer day.

Wow, lets give the guy running from police wearing a padded coat in summer time, heading for a subway platform or train the benefit of the doubt.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 25, 2005, 4:31 pm

Lynks wrote:There were probably a lot of people around. I dont think cops are aloud to shoot at people with that many people just standing in the way.

I can understand that, but if you have the option of shooting somebody in the hallway leading down to the subway or shooting him on the crowded train (or possibly let him blow the train up), which one would you go for?

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 25, 2005, 5:11 pm

Interesting story:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.a...55E2703,00.html

Innocent man's 26-minute journey to a violent death
Correspondents in Sao Paulo and London
July 26, 2005
IT took 26 minutes for Jean Charles de Menezes to get from his flat in Tulse Hill to the entrance of Stockwell Tube station. In that time, the 27-year-old electrician did not appear to realise that a team of 30 Scotland Yard officers was following his every move.

Police were staking out the red-brick block of flats in Scotia Road, London, after the address had been found in documents left in one of the rucksacks abandoned after the failure of last Thursday's attacks.

There was also evidence that the crop-haired bomber in the sweatshirt with a New York logo on the front, seen in CCTV pictures fleeing Oval station, had recently stayed at the address.

There are eight separate flats in the block. When Mr de Menezes emerged from the communal front door just after 9.30am, the police must have realised from the photographs they carried that he was not one of the four bombers.

Even so, they decided that he was "a likely candidate" to follow because of his demeanour and colour, so one group set off on foot after him.

As he waited at a nearby bus stop, the reconnaissance team sought urgent instructions on whether to challenge him or let him board a bus. They were worried about the bulky, padded jacket he had zipped up on such a warm morning.

The decision was taken to let him go, in the hope he might lead his shadows to the bombers. Mr de Menezes was heading to Willesden Green to fix an alarm system. After surviving the crime-ridden slums of Brazil, London seemed the perfect, peaceful place for him to start a new life.

When it was obvious he was getting off at Stockwell Tube station, the team on the bus alerted a three-man team of marksmen to move in. The decision was taken at Scotland Yard that he must not be allowed to get to the platform.

The marksmen were told: "If you think he has explosives under his coat and he fails to heed shouted warnings, then you must shoot to kill." As the three plainclothes officers closed in, they say they screamed their first warning that they were armed police. They say he turned, ran into the station concourse, vaulted the ticket barriers and reached a waiting train before they could catch him. They shot him five times in the head when they believed he was trying to trigger a bomb.

His cousin, Alex Alves, claims Mr de Menezes was "playing around with a friend in a game of chase outside the station".

The police insist he was alone during the entire journey.

By far the most controversial claim is from several witnesses who cast doubt on police statements that they shouted a warning or identified themselves before firing.

Lee Ruston, 32, who was on the platform, said he did not hear any of the three shout "police" or anything like it. Mr Ruston, a company director, said he saw two officers put on blue baseball caps marked "police" but that the frightened electrician could not have seen that because he had his back to the officers and was running with his head down.

Less than a minute later, Mr de Menezes was pinned to the floor of the carriage by two men while a third fired five shots into the base of his skull.

His parents, struggling to understand why their generous and loving son was killed, have demanded a public inquiry into his death.

Maria de Menezes, his disabled mother, speaking from her home in Brazil, said: "Jean went to Europe to work, that is all. He went there for his family, to send us money. I feel like my heart has broken into a thousand pieces. I can't believe my son will never walk through our door alive again."

Mr de Menezes, 27, known as Jem to his friends, was one of two children born to a farming family in Gonzaga, a 5500- strong mining village 800km northeast of Sao Paulo, Brazil's biggest city.

The Times

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » July 25, 2005, 5:17 pm

gee that article isn't even remotely biased.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » July 25, 2005, 5:21 pm

His cousin, Alex Alves, claims Mr de Menezes was "playing around with a friend in a game of chase outside the station".

ROFL

miir · Post by **miir** » July 25, 2005, 5:26 pm

So living in the same apartment building as suspected terrorists and wearing a jacket that might be a bit heavy for the weather is grounds for enough suspicion to warrant being followed by 10 plainclothes law enforcement officers?

If you were someone who was facing deportation (expired visa) and were approached by several plainclothes officers would your first insinct not be to run?

Would the officers have followed, chased and shot this individual if they were not brown?

I mean seriously.. the guy was not even middle eastern or muslim... he was just fucking brown...

What really disturbs me is that they shot this guy FIVE TIMES in the back of the head after he had been caught. I was always under the impression that cops are never to let emotion control their actions. It clouds their judgement.... someone in their position should never let that happen.
Shooting to kill is one thing. A trained marksman should only require one single shot at that close range to neutralize a target. Discharching a firearm 5 times from near point blank range at an unarmed target can only really be attributed to rage. Do we really need people like that protecting us?

Anyhow, on a completely different topic....

These are people who have one goal in mind. Kill anyone who does submit to their thinking. They will attack us while we are in Iraq and after we leave. They are the worst kind of people, fanatics that hide behind ignorant people, controling them and using them to spread their fear

So you think that the actions of your government have nothing to do with the motivations of these terrorists? You probably think that Palestinians hate Isrealis simply because they are jewish.

Sad... just sad.

Sabek · Post by **Sabek** » July 25, 2005, 5:28 pm

His cousin, Alex Alves, claims Mr de Menezes was "playing around with a friend in a game of chase outside the station".

Tag! You're it!

Seriously this would be akin to flying an airplane near the Empire State building or the Pentagon a few weeks post 9/11 and wondering why you got shot out of the sky.

miir · Post by **miir** » July 25, 2005, 5:33 pm

Seriously this would be akin to flying an airplane near the Empire State building or the Pentagon a few weeks post 9/11 and wondering why you got shot out of the sky

I fail to see the connection.

With a few edits, I think it would be a bit more accurate.

Seriously this would be akin to a brown man flying an airplane over the state of new york a few weeks post 9/11 and wondering why you got shot out of the sky

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » July 25, 2005, 5:34 pm

miir wrote:So living in the same apartment building as suspected terrorists and wearing a jacket that might be a bit heavy for the weather is grounds for enough suspicion to warrant being followed by 10 plainclothes law enforcement officers?

Umm, absolutely without a shadow of a doubt?

Nick · Post by **Nick** » July 25, 2005, 6:18 pm

Bullshit.

Absurdly humid in England? Have you ever even been there?

Just because some guy runs from the Police does not legitimise the use of 5 bullets forcibly plunged into the back of his head, even given the circumstances.

We are actually now doing the job for the terrorists. Fantastic!

Sabek, your post makes zero sense whatsoever.

Pillocks.

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » July 25, 2005, 6:44 pm

Well Miir,

While no country is innocent, these Morons, from many nationalities have shown they do not care about anyone, even their own people. Yes, these attacks have come about partly because of our countries past dealings with these nations. I do not however think the majority of those people advocate what these zealots are doing, nor do I think they believe the ramblings of these people. If you read below, then you know they are not true Muslims. They are trying to control the minds of others. They want power and they can only get that through fear, hatred and killing. I definitely think they would be doing these things whether we are there or not. I do not believe they would have so many coordinated attacks, but they would definitely do it. Clinton was supposed to have decent relationships with most of the arabic nations, yet 911 was planned almost exclusively during his watch. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU, OR ME OR EVEN THERE OWN PEOPLE!!! They are using this as a chance to further there agenda and hopefully there powerbase.

Given the heightened alert issued by the
> government on Wednesday, we have decided to release a partial
> translation of a past issue of the Al-Battar Magazine, originally
> released in March 2004. This issue in particular discusses how to
> choose targets inside cities, such as economic and diplomatic targets,
> and expounds upon the pros and cons of such attacks. It also ranks
> human targets by order of importance, placing Americans as the top
> targets.
>
> Below is the translation of a portion of the manual
>
>
> TARGETS INSIDE CITIES
>
> Types of Targets within the Cities:
>
> 1. Targets with an ideological aspect: The use of force is not
> recommended at the beginning of a military jihadi operation against
> religious ideological targets except in some cases such as:
>
> . Christianization of pure Islamic communities, like what happened in
> Yemen, in Iraq, and in Saudi Arabia - specifically in Riyadh - where
> Bibles were recently distributed to residences. Hunting down and
> killing whoever is responsible for performing such an act is a good
> thing. These people's identity is known to the Mujahideen, and we ask
> God to facilitate the task of going after them.
> . Undercover spying operations under any disguise, even if it was
> religious. Dealing with spiritual and religious Islamic figures, even
> if they were spies, should be done in a way to avoid a violent
> reaction from Muslims who were misled by those agents. Hitting them
> will only glorify and make symbols out of them. May God's anger fall
> upon them.
> . One of the exceptions also is publicity exercised by certain
> religious figures such as ministers, priests and rabbis, in which they
> attack Islam and Muslims. An example of that is when that damned
> American minister cursed the prophet of God - may God enable us to
> kill him -, as Sayyid Nossair - may God release him from his
> imprisonment - killed Rabbi Kahane - may he be cursed for cursing the
> prophet.
> . One other exception is a financial, military or moral mobilization
> of ideological figures (Jews and Christian) against Muslims.
>
> 2. Economic targets: The goals of hitting those targets are to create
> a disruption in the stability required for moving the economic sector
> towards progression. This was accomplished by hitting the petroleum
> wells and pipes in Iraq, which kept foreign companies away from
> touching the oil, or at least created an absence of security and
> stability needed to steal the Muslims' wealth. Another goal is to
> withdraw or force the withdrawal of foreign capitals from the local
> market. The economic powers present on the site of conflict have been
> badly affected. As a result to the blessed strikes in Madrid, for
> instance, the entire European economy suffered. That was a double
> strike to the economy of the governments of the Crusaders, the Jews or
> the apostates. Following are some practical examples covering that
> side:
>
> . Hitting the investments operations of the Jews and the Christians in
> the Muslim countries.
> . Hitting the international corporations.
> . Hitting the international experts in economy
> . Hitting the imports brought from enemy crusader countries by taking
> military actions -such as bombing and burning some American
> restaurants - or by resorting to political means such as boycott.
> . Hitting raw materials stolen from the Muslim countries, as was the
> case with the French Petroleum vessel, and the petroleum pipes in
> Iraq. This type of strikes is determined by the supreme leaders as
> they are the ones monitoring such actions.
> . Assassination and liquidation of Jews active in the economic field,
> and disciplining whomever deals with them economically, but only after
> issuing a warning to them. Only collaborators will be assassinated.
>
> 3. Human targets: "We must target and kill the Jews and the
> Christians, as we say to each combatant of God, his prophet and the
> believers: We come to slaughter you. Nowadays, we must not be limited
> by boundaries, or be separated by geography, as each Muslim home is
> our home, and their territories are our territories. We must transform
> the Blasphemers' homes into hell as they did to the Muslim countries.
> (If you punish, do it the same way you were punished). Therefore, all
> active entities in the whole world should discard the geographic
> boundaries set by the enemies. They need to persevere in turning the
> Blasphemers' countries into war zones, and keep the blaspheming
> countries and their agents busy with their issues, as they turned the
> Muslim countries into experimental fields for their weapons and
> inventions. Transforming their territories into hell and destruction
> is a must. With God's permission, the sons of the Muslim nation are
> capable of accomplishing that.
>
> High priority in such operations is given to Jewish and Christian
> Officials in the Muslim countries. The goal is to prevent them from
> settling down in the Muslim territories. It is recommended in the
> beginning to spot easy targets that are not protected. Communities
> from blaspheming countries directly involved in supporting local
> apostates are given the highest level of priority. For instance, in
> Saudi, Americans are our primary target, followed by the British. In
> Iraq it is the Americans. In Afghanistan: the Americans. In Algeria:
> The French. In Indonesia: The Australians, and so on.
>
> Human targets sorted by level of importance:
>
> 1. The Jews: They are divided in grades with respect to importance:
> American and Israeli Jews are first targeted, then British Jews, then
> French Jews, and so on...
>
> 2. The Christians: The grades of importance are as follows:
> . Americans
> . British
> . Spaniards
> . Australians
> . Canadians
> . Italians
>
> The above categories are divided into sections with respect to
> importance:
> . Financial, Economic, and Businessmen, as money is of the essence in
> this era.
> . Diplomats, politicians, intellectuals, analysts and political
> missions.
> . Scientists and experts.
> . Military commanders and soldiers.
> . Tourists, and recreational groups, and every person who has been
> warned by the Mujahideen not to enter Muslim territories.
>
> 3. The apostates: They are graded as follows:
> . Whoever is close to the Jewish and Christian Governments is
> considered one of the most important targets, such as Hosni Moubarak
> and the rulers of the Arab Peninsula and their advisors.
> . Seculars and modernists who spread corruption within the believers,
> and mock religion. Those bastards are considered the hypocrites of the
> fifteenth century.
> . Spies and investigators, as they are the shields and the fences of
> the Jews and Christians and they are the striking hand for the
> apostate rulers.
>
> PURPOSES OF STRIKING HUMAN TARGETS
>
> 1. Clarification of the nature of the ideological conflict, as it
> shows in our targeting the Jews and the Christians.
> 2. Showing the main enemy. This may be part of the first purpose.
> 3. Getting rid of the insolent apostates, purifying the Land,
> relieving the country and its subjects from them, as well as stopping
> their peers.
> 4. Spreading terror in the enemy ranks, as it is essentially mentioned
> in the law of God and is a duty imposed by the honorable verse:
> (Prepare all the power that you can get, and the horse reins to
> terrify the enemy of God and your enemy with).
> 5. Lifting the spirits of the Islamic "Ummah" [nation].
> 6. Destroying the imposing image of the system that the strikes were
> against, as after the New York and Washington strikes, the United
> States nose was rubbed in the dirt.
> 7. Disrupting the blasphemers and apostates' political projects: As
> had happened after bombing the Italians in Iraq, when Italy refrained
> from sending soldiers to Iraq, and as recently the Spanish Prime
> Minister made a commitment to withdraw his forces from Iraq after the
> Madrid bombing.
> 8. Punishing them for killing Muslims, as the above God said: (If you
> punish, do it the same way you were punished).
>
> CHARACTERISTICS OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS INSIDE THE CITIES:
>
> 1. Lifting the "Ummah" and the Mujahideen's spirits, and bringing
> down, rather destroying the enemies' spirits with the grace of God.
> 2. Asserting the credibility of the group (Islamic) before the
> society. The fact that these operations take place in the cities
> enables people to witness the struck targets, then the media will not
> be able to mislead them.
> 3. Disabling the regime and stopping it from pursuing its activities
> any further.
> 4. Showing the meaning of witnessing that there is no other God and
> that Mohammed is his Prophet, and realizing the unity.
> 5. The loss of influential individuals and symbols that is inflicted
> on those countries and regimes.
> 6. Affecting the economy of those countries.
> 7. Skills and qualifications that will be acquired by the Mujahideen,
> which will enable them to lead the "Ummah" later on.
> 8. Studying and analyzing mistakes, and avoiding them in future
> operations with God's permission.
> 9. Preparing the "Ummah" and the group members for the confrontations
> and fierce battles that Al Mustafa -God prayed on him and gave him
> peace - had talked about.
> 10. Gaining more collaborators with every successful operation, and
> increasing the Mujahideen popularity.
> 11. Forcing the regime to change its policy.
> 12. Convulsing the trust amongst the regime members, as we mentioned
> before, the possibility of a clash between the military and the
> political departments, or forcing political parties to strike one
> another, as with the increase of the strikes - with God's permission -
> the Government's symbols will lose trust amongst each other.

So after reading this you can see, yes they are angry we are there. One of the reasons is the war, but the other is our sheer presence. If there are American companies in Muslim lands then they must be targeted before their vile american concepts can be spread. Ignorance is bliss and killing is just a method to get there.

America is not innocent as I said, neither is any other country in the world, we all have skeletons, but this group is out of control. There is no way to solve it. I want us out of Iraq, I think we should cut back on our tis with Israel and Saudi Arabia as well. They are both corrupt governments that we chose for oil and political gains, but even if we did these things the attacks will come.

I am sorry to ramble but a couple of you think every issue is black and white and this is not one of them. Religious fanatics cannot be dealt with in any way and have a happy result.

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » July 25, 2005, 6:51 pm

I suppose a better solution is to just let the terrorists bomb away. Eventually they will get bored and go on to play a new game. Ignoring them is the best bet.

I don't understand when this became a racist issue. I bet if that man were white he'd be just as dead. Except then it would be a big whine that he was Irish

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » July 25, 2005, 7:32 pm

I have no doubt his skin color was a factor in the equation. Was he treated differently than if he was white and the police were dealing with a white terrorist group and he emerged from a house they were watching wearing a heavy jacket in the summer and made a b-line to a location that two previous bombing attacks have been made in the passed two weeks? I would say no.

Just because some guy runs from the Police does not legitimise the use of 5 bullets forcibly plunged into the back of his head, even given the circumstances.

Given the circumstances? given the cicumstances around the events that transpired I would be a lot angrier if he wasn't put down instantly the moment there was little chance of a civilian being shot accidentally.

do you really think the police shot him just because they wanted to kill a muslim or something?

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » July 25, 2005, 8:07 pm

Their intent is secondary, people keep harping on it, but it's not central to the story.

Would the cops have done this two months ago? Unlikely. 1-0 Terrorists

Would people have been making exuses for summarily executing young men based on the most flimsy circumstantial evidence two months ago? Highly unlikely. 2-0 Terrorists.

There's also much being made of the lad's choice of jacket, I don't know about you, but if I've only got so much cash to spend on clothes and I live in England I'm going to buy the jacket that allows me to go outside in the middle of winter first. Perhaps it's the only one he had.

There's not many poor people that get to piss away cash on on-line games so perhaps none of you can understand not having more than one jacket, or the first instinct to run when some people start shouting and waving guns.

There would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth if it was your relative.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » July 25, 2005, 8:36 pm

do you really think the police shot him just because they wanted to kill a muslim or something?

Obviously not

I do however think it was a massive error in judgement and choice, especially since they had already piled on top of him (according to the eye witness accounts I have heard, both on the day and since).

You won't actually see the police themselves disagreeing with me.

It's not like I don't understand that the situation in London is extremely fragile and confusing for everyone there atm, I do however agree with Zealeth in that this does nothing but further show that "our way of life" is in fact being massively adversly affected by terrorist attacks in exactly the way we shouldn't be letting them.

Which is sort of an important issue.

Tyek, regarding your post, I agree with the opinion that terrorists (whether they be Al Quaida, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, IRA, Tim McVeigh etc) choose to murder innocent people to highlight their own point of view. I don't think anyone here is supporting that, if anyone is under the impression I do, they are completely wrong.
However, brushing off our own collective guilt with "every side has skeletons" basically ignores the entire lead up to the very existence to this war on terror.

Which does nothing but make the quagmire of confusing propoganda, vastly different opinions, lies and truth all the harder to distinguish between.

Very insightful comments Bubba btw.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » July 25, 2005, 9:12 pm

miir wrote:So you think that the actions of your government have nothing to do with the motivations of these terrorists? You probably think that Palestinians hate Isrealis simply because they are jewish.

Maybe the Palestinians should have been(and still be) pissed at all of the regions around Israel for casting them aside, and then try to snuff the country from existance some 36 years ago.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » July 25, 2005, 9:15 pm

Chidoro wrote:
miir wrote:So you think that the actions of your government have nothing to do with the motivations of these terrorists? You probably think that Palestinians hate Isrealis simply because they are jewish.
Maybe the Palestinians should have been(and still be) pissed at all of the regions around Israel for casting them aside, and then try to snuff the country from existance some 36 years ago.

I'm still pissed those bastard Russians caused a cold war to last nearly 50 years. Let's wipe out Moscow just to keep old grudges alive.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » July 25, 2005, 9:21 pm

Maybe the Palestinians should have been(and still be) pissed at all of the regions around Israel for casting them aside, and then try to snuff the country from existance some 36 years ago.

Oh dear god.....................................................

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » July 25, 2005, 9:24 pm

Nick wrote:
Maybe the Palestinians should have been(and still be) pissed at all of the regions around Israel for casting them aside, and then try to snuff the country from existance some 36 years ago.
Oh dear god.....................................................

Exactly the putz I'd expect to type in

Nick · Post by **Nick** » July 25, 2005, 10:52 pm

Yes I am a putz because I don't support the mindless oppression of Palestinians.

Not surprising you would think that Chidoro.

Sabek · Post by **Sabek** » July 25, 2005, 11:19 pm

Nick wrote:Sabek, your post makes zero sense whatsoever.

Because it is contrary to your "OMGADZ TEH POLICES AND TEH GOBERMENTS ARE TEH DEBIL" stance on every sinlge post in this forum?

It makes perfect sense. To someone with some sense.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » July 25, 2005, 11:26 pm

You call that sense?

Got any other crackers there Mr Comedian?

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » July 26, 2005, 12:11 am

Nick wrote:Yes I am a putz because I don't support the mindless oppression of Palestinians.

Not surprising you would think that Chidoro.

No, you're a putz because you feign knowledge of history. Not surprising considering your utter ignorance on the situation.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » July 26, 2005, 12:45 am

Care to fill me in on what you assume I am unaware of?

Farrel · Post by **Farrel** » July 26, 2005, 1:39 am

took a trip to london a few years back and I recall it being much colder than I expected (in may), so I picked up a hoody from the GAP in picadilly circus...

anyway, Im still completely in favor of the non-lethal, detaining law enforcement weapons in development here in the states (tranqs, long-range stuns, etc.). they couldnt come soon enough. of course, Im all for the rifles and whatnot in severe situations.

but its hard to take a side in a situation like this. the cops were doing their job, but an innocent fool is dead. and five shots in the back of the head with the dude stomach-down seems excessive.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » July 26, 2005, 7:12 am

Nick wrote:Care to fill me in on what you assume I am unaware of?

Why? You're obviously an expert on the subject already. You've managed to gather your opinion by completely twisting the events of the six day war in your little skull. No amount of actual fact is going to make you believe it and, therefore, you sound like a putz every time you hit enter regarding the subject

Nick · Post by **Nick** » July 26, 2005, 10:37 am

It's very simple, either try me or shut the fuck up.

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » July 26, 2005, 12:11 pm

Farrel wrote:took a trip to london a few years back and I recall it being much colder than I expected (in may), so I picked up a hoody from the GAP in picadilly circus...

anyway, Im still completely in favor of the non-lethal, detaining law enforcement weapons in development here in the states (tranqs, long-range stuns, etc.). they couldnt come soon enough. of course, Im all for the rifles and whatnot in severe situations.

but its hard to take a side in a situation like this. the cops were doing their job, but an innocent fool is dead. and five shots in the back of the head with the dude stomach-down seems excessive.

5 times in the back of the head or once makes no difference. If you are shooting someone in the head the intent is to kill. That being the case might as well make sure.

To the fucking retards who think the police over reacted let me ask you one question. How hard is it to trigger a bomb?

I don't imagine that it requires a lot of effort (pressing a button).

Nick, for fuck sakes you are a bright guy. What would you be saying if there were 3 dead cops and more civilians dead because this guy was indeed a bomber and the cops had made the mistake of giving the guy a chance?

Miir, you are fucking right his skin color had something to do with this. Justifiably so I might add.

Lets examine the facts.

1. The bombings were carried out by people of mid east descent.
2. People from that region tend to be fucking BROWN in skin color
3. He fled after being warned by the police.
4. He was wearing a heavy jacket in winter.
5. London had just been attacked by SUICIDE BOMBERS

If you think for one minute that the police were out for a thrill kill you are fucking nuts. The cops were probably just as terrified as the guy who got shot.

miir · Post by **miir** » July 26, 2005, 12:55 pm

1. The bombings were carried out by people of mid east descent.
2. People from that region tend to be fucking BROWN in skin color
3. He fled after being warned by the police.
4. He was wearing a heavy jacket in winter.
5. London had just been attacked by SUICIDE BOMBERS

Brazil isn't in the middle east

The reason he ran was liely because his visa was expired... and there is some question as to wether the police clearly identified themselves or not.

Ignoring the typo, 13-17 degrees is hardly shorts and t-shit weather. Look at the fucking interviews with the police yesterday. In the photos the cops and the reporters and everyone else was wearing long sleeved jackets/windbreakers. Summer in London isn't like the 30-35 degree weather we've been getting here in Toronto. Would you wear a coat in the morning if the weather report said the temp was going to drop to 13 degrees in the evening?

If you think for one minute that the police were out for a thrill kill you are fucking nuts

Who the fuck said they were 'out for a thrill kill'?
Why do you idiots try to make your points seem less fucking retarded by making shit up?

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 26, 2005, 1:12 pm

Atokal wrote: 1. The bombings were carried out by people of mid east descent.
2. People from that region tend to be fucking BROWN in skin color

Brazil is not in the mid east and even though I know they all look alike to you.. they truly don't heh.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » July 26, 2005, 2:40 pm

Here's a little tip for you liberal pussies. Look to your leader, Kyoukan, for guidance on this issue.

There's plenty of opportunities to whine like little bitches about your causes but this particular case isn't one of them. Save your outrages* for something more worthy.

*a feeling of righteous anger

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » July 26, 2005, 2:43 pm

You know, considering how often the liberals on this board get accused of being Kyoukan's lapdog, criticizing them for disagreeing with her is pretty fucking stupid.

That said, I agree with Kyoukan.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » July 26, 2005, 2:51 pm

Fuck your tribal assumptions Winnow.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » July 26, 2005, 2:58 pm

Sueven wrote:You know, considering how often the liberals on this board get accused of being Kyoukan's lapdog, criticizing them for disagreeing with her is pretty fucking stupid.

That said, I agree with Kyoukan.

It's clear that most of the liberals with a grasp on reality understand what happened here. Topics like these separate those that have a fighting chance to see the bigger picture from those that rant and rave over any issue that appears to fit the mold without taking into account anything else.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 26, 2005, 3:30 pm

Midnyte is posting as Winnow now?

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » July 26, 2005, 4:38 pm

Nick wrote:It's very simple, either try me or shut the fuck up.

It's even simpler than that, either learn about the topic or continue to look like a putz every time you comment on it.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » July 27, 2005, 12:24 am

Winnow wrote:
Sueven wrote:You know, considering how often the liberals on this board get accused of being Kyoukan's lapdog, criticizing them for disagreeing with her is pretty fucking stupid.

That said, I agree with Kyoukan.
It's clear that most of the liberals with a grasp on reality understand what happened here. Topics like these separate those that have a fighting chance to see the bigger picture from those that rant and rave over any issue that appears to fit the mold without taking into account anything else.

I think it's more a seperation of fears. Rednecks and other conservatives are poor at risk assessment.

You flock to the southern states and yet your chances of being killed/maimed/ruined by natural disaster is much higher there, but you don't see it as a real threat. However, terrorism, which has killed less people in your entire history as a nation than a month's worth of driving is worthy of throwing away your rights, accepting police executing people on flimsy circumstantial evidence, etc, etc.

And of course, I'm the one that has a poor grip on reality...

Farrel · Post by **Farrel** » July 27, 2005, 12:36 am

Atokal wrote: 5 times in the back of the head or once makes no difference. If you are shooting someone in the head the intent is to kill. That being the case might as well make sure.

Im not sure how you consider it ethical to shoot a man in the back of the head while he's pinned even once. I believe many people/cultures consider that an execution. but to remain on topic here, shooting a man in the back of the head five times is alright because they needed to make sure he was dead? then when is it excessive or overkill? should they have emptied the clip, reloaded, and gone for seconds?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » July 27, 2005, 4:12 am

Zaelath wrote:
I think it's more a seperation of fears. Rednecks and other conservatives are poor at risk assessment.

You flock to the southern states and yet your chances of being killed/maimed/ruined by natural disaster is much higher there, but you don't see it as a real threat. However, terrorism, which has killed less people in your entire history as a nation than a month's worth of driving is worthy of throwing away your rights, accepting police executing people on flimsy circumstantial evidence, etc, etc.

And of course, I'm the one that has a poor grip on reality...

What kind of logic is that? We're discussing a single case with well known recent events leading up to it.

With your lame argument, I could counter that people like to swim in the ocean even though it's not safe but after a shark attack, there are many less people in the water for awhile and it's probably not in a shark's best interest to be swimming around shore for the next few days. Of course, you should have more sympathy for the unknowing sharks as they probably don't have a Shark Channel to watch the news and know that it's open season on them. Maybe I should put it in terms of kangaroos and boomerangs for you. How about dingoes? For example, say a dingo takes a human kid...hmm lets see

A national parks ranger kills a dingo on Fraser Island, Australia. A culling of the wild dogs was carried out Friday following the death of a 9-year-old boy bitten by the dogs.

A dramatic cull of dingoes launched after two of the wild dogs killed a 9-year-old boy on an Australian island resort has resulted in the killing of 28 of the animals by late Saturday.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » July 27, 2005, 4:24 am

Farrel wrote:Im not sure how you consider it ethical to shoot a man in the back of the head while he's pinned even once.

because he might have been trying to detonate a bomb?

whoever shot him had to make a split decision. I would say he made the right one but people with 20/20 hindsight would probably disagree with that. what if was a bomb laden terrorist and while wrestling with the police he reached into his jacket and detonated it? then people would be on the forums saying why didn't the police just shoot the bastard in the face as soon as they were in range.